Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Global supervenience fails to entail weak individual supe... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Global supervenience fails to entail weak individual supervenience

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Petrie's example contains a world (w1) that violates weak supervenience of A on B
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.That same world (w1) fails to be a counterexample to global supervenience of A on B
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A failure of weak supervenience that is compatible with global supervenience shows global supervenience does not entail weak supervenience
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Petrie's example relies on a non-standard individuation of properties that most physicalists would reject as gerrymandered.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If A-properties in Petrie's world are defined by their relational or holistic features, weak supervenience's indiscernibility condition cannot be violated without also violating global supervenience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A counterexample that presupposes a contested property-individuation scheme does not establish a genuine logical gap between global and weak supervenience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Global supervenience quantifies over entire possible worlds, and any world-wide B-duplicate is thereby an individual-level B-duplicate across all its constituents.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If two worlds are B-indiscernible globally, then every object in one world has a B-indiscernible counterpart in the other, satisfying weak supervenience's individual-level condition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This entailment holds under standard possible-worlds semantics as defended by Lewis, making the purported failure a result of non-standard assumptions rather than a genuine logical independence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    A counterexample that presupposes a contested property-individuation scheme does...A failure of weak supervenience that is compatible with global supervenience sho...Global supervenience quantifies over entire possible worlds, and any world-wide ...If A-properties in Petrie's world are defined by their relational or holistic fe...
    +5 moreShow less
    If two worlds are B-indiscernible globally, then every object in one world has a...Petrie's example contains a world (w1) that violates weak supervenience of A on ...Petrie's example relies on a non-standard individuation of properties that most ...That same world (w1) fails to be a counterexample to global supervenience of A o...This entailment holds under standard possible-worlds semantics as defended by Le...

    Similar

    Global supervenience fails to entail strong individual supervenience96%Strong individual supervenience entails intermediate and weak global s...90%Global supervenience and strong individual supervenience are not equiv...89%Global supervenience does not entail strong supervenience89%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: supervenience
    View source passageHide passage
    In response, Kim conceded that global supervenience fails to entail strong supervenience (1987, 318), and went on to claim that Petrie’s example also shows that global supervenience fails to entail weak. Notice that w1 alone violates the weak supervenience of A on B, but also fails to be a counterexample to the global supervenience of A on B. Kim thus concluded that global supervenience fails to entail weak or strong individual supervenience.
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit